-Sanjay Chavre, Advisor, TAGMA India
Standards in manufacturing are often seen as the invisible scaffolding that holds an industry together, quietly shaping quality, safety, and credibility. Yet when these standards arrive suddenly as government mandates, they can feel less like scaffolding and more like a wall, especially for MSMEs who must climb it with limited resources. The Press Tool Punches Quality Control Order (QCO) of 2020 is one such policy moment, which is ambitious in its intent to elevate Indian tooling to global benchmarks, but complex in its impact on a sector built largely on custom-made precision. This article examines how the industry is grappling with that tension, and what kind of support and phased approach could turn compliance from a burden into a pathway for competitiveness.
In 2020, the Government of India introduced a significant regulatory change, i.e., the Press Tool Punches (Quality Control) Order, 2020*, mandating BIS certification for specific press tool punches. Effective from May 2021, this order requires compliance with Indian Standards (IS 4296 Parts 1, 2, and 3) for manufacturing, importing, and selling these products within India.
The stated objective was clear, i.e., to standardise quality, prevent the influx of substandard tools, and align Indian manufacturing with global benchmarks. Yet, the implementation has raised profound questions within the industry, particularly among Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), which form the backbone of India’s tooling sector.
Industry Concerns and Practical Realities
The initial response from the Indian tooling industry to the Press Tool Punches QCO was marked by apprehension and concern. MSMEs, which constitute nearly 95% of manufacturers in this sector, highlighted several critical challenges that go beyond routine compliance.
One of the foremost issues is the operational burden. BIS certification requires extensive documentation, factory inspections, and product testing. For smaller firms with limited resources, this process creates significant logistical and financial strain, often diverting attention away from production itself.
Another concern lies in the definition of ‘standard’. Press tools are inherently custom-made, tailored to specific customer designs and applications. Applying rigid standards such as IS 4296, originally designed for mass-manufactured products, to bespoke punches is problematic. The very nature of this industry is built on precision customisation, and a one-size-fits-all approach risks undermining that flexibility.
The impact on custom manufacturing is therefore profound. If every unique dimension or material variation requires separate certification, the order effectively restricts the adaptability that toolmakers rely upon. A punch is always manufactured to meet the order purchaser’s specifications. Unlike tyres or pens, which can be standardised, customised tools resist rigid product categorisation. Imposing uniform product standards on such tools is inherently difficult and risks stifling the very innovation that drives this sector.
Certification Landscape and the Question of Standards
At present, statistics on BIS licensees for press tool punches are not publicly available. What is clear, however, is that the Foreign Manufacturers Certification Scheme (FMCS) enables international manufacturers to obtain BIS licences, ensuring that the mandate applies equally to imports as well as domestic production. This creates a level playing field in principle, but it also reinforces the fact that compliance is a legal requirement for market access, with penalties attached for non-compliance.
The purpose of the QCO is to guarantee that punches meet essential safety, performance, and reliability benchmarks. The IS 4296 series of standards covers critical aspects such as material composition, hardness, dimensional tolerances, and surface finish, all of which are vital not only for durability but also for preventing premature failure in industrial environments.
For custom-made punches, the order seeks to establish a baseline of quality and safety. While dimensions may vary according to customer requirements, the material grade, heat treatment process, and overall manufacturing quality can still conform to a recognised standard. The intent is not to stifle customisation but to prevent unsafe practices and the use of substandard materials that could compromise safety.
In this context, standards can be applied in two ways: to components or to processes. Components that are universally used, such as dry cell batteries in a torch, can be standardised across applications. Similarly, in press tools, certain components or the manufacturing process itself can be standardised. Process certification, such as ISO 9001, validates that a manufacturer uses well-defined, monitored, and continually improved processes. This approach ensures quality outcomes without imposing rigid product specifications on inherently bespoke tools.
Continuing Relevance amid New Safety Regulations
The 2024 Omnibus Technical Regulation on machine safety introduced a broader safety framework for industrial machinery, covering equipment such as press brakes and power presses. While this regulation strengthens safeguards at the level of the machine itself, the Press Tool Punches QCO remains highly relevant because it addresses the component that operates within those machines, the punch.
Even the safest machine cannot function reliably if its components are of substandard quality. A poorly manufactured punch can shatter during operation, creating risks that no amount of built-in machine safeguards can fully prevent. In this sense, the QCO and the Omnibus Regulation act as complementary layers of safety – one ensures the integrity of the machine, while the other guarantees the quality of the critical tool component.
Key Quality Parameters in BIS Standards
The BIS standards (IS 4296 Parts 1, 2, and 3) establish clear requirements across several dimensions of quality and performance. These include:
- Material Specifications: Chemical composition and grade of steel, typically high-carbon and high-chromium, to ensure strength and durability.
- Heat Treatment: Defined hardness levels (HRC) and testing procedures to guarantee impact resistance and long service life.
- Dimensional Tolerances: Specifications for shank diameter, head dimensions, overall length, and concentricity, ensuring interchangeability and proper fit within press systems.
- Surface Finish: Requirements designed to reduce friction and wear, thereby improving efficiency and longevity.
- Testing Procedures: Standardised methods to validate compliance with all of the above parameters.
Global Practices and India’s Policy Shift
Across the world, standards such as ISO 8020 (Punches) are typically voluntary, driven by market demand, customer specifications, and liability concerns. Manufacturers adopt them to assure quality and performance, but compliance is not legally mandated. What is mandatory, however, are national safety regulations for machinery, for example, OSHA requirements in the United States or European Union safety directives. These focus on the safety of the entire system rather than individual components.
India’s QCO represents a significant departure from this voluntary model. By making certification compulsory, it aligns with global safety regimes but also imposes unique burdens on MSMEs, which must now navigate mandatory compliance in a sector dominated by custom-made products.
INTEGRATED APPROACH TO MSME COMPLIANCE
Context: The Rajiv Gauba Report
A recent report by Rajiv Gauba of NITI Aayog highlighted the structural weaknesses of MSMEs in meeting QCO requirements. Financing constraints, limited technology adoption, skill gaps, and lack of institutional support have made compliance difficult. The report even suggested scrapping QCOs for around 200 products. Yet the real issue lies not in the existence of QCOs themselves, but in the absence of supportive mechanisms to help MSMEs comply.
Why QCOs Are Essential?
Despite these challenges, QCOs remain critical for India’s industrial future, as:
- They upgrade Indian manufacturing to global standards.
- They ensure consumers have access to high-quality products.
- They enable Indian firms to compete internationally, where quality benchmarks are non-negotiable.
Scrapping QCOs would undermine India’s long-term competitiveness. What is needed instead is an integrated approach that balances MSME challenges with the necessity of mandatory standards.
Learning from Global Best Practices
Several countries have successfully combined mandatory standards with strong support systems for smaller enterprises, such as:
- Germany offersSME innovation grants and subsidised loans for technology adoption.
- Japan providesshared testing infrastructure and certification support through METI programmes.
- Singapore focuseson government-funded skill development aligned with compliance requirements.
- China has developedcluster-based ecosystems with shared R&D and testing facilities.
- European Union supports SMEs through simplified regulatory frameworks and phased compliance timelines.
These examples demonstrate that mandatory standards can coexist with supportive ecosystems, enabling smaller firms to upgrade capabilities while maintaining competitiveness. India’s challenge is to adapt these lessons into its own policy framework, ensuring that QCOs become enablers of growth rather than barriers to participation.
Towards an Integrated Approach for India
For India to balance the necessity of QCOs with the realities faced by MSMEs, a holistic framework is essential. Such a framework should combine regulatory ambition with practical support, ensuring that compliance becomes a pathway to competitiveness rather than a barrier to participation.
One key element is the provision of extended timelines. Instead of imposing sudden deadlines, staggered compliance schedules similar to the phased approach adopted in the European Union would allow MSMEs to align gradually with the standards.
A dedicated MSME Quality Fund could provide subsidies for certification, testing, and technology upgrades, reducing the financial burden on smaller firms. Alongside this, shared infrastructure ecosystems, regional hubs equipped with common testing laboratories, R&D centres, and certification facilities would lower costs and democratise access to compliance resources.
Equally important is skill development and advisory support. Training programmes aligned with QCO requirements would prepare the workforce to meet new standards, while advisory services could guide enterprises through documentation and certification processes. Finally, a digital compliance platform offering single-window access to guidance, templates, and tracking tools would reduce bureaucratic friction and simplify the compliance journey.
The underlying principle is clear: QCOs must not be imposed as guillotine deadlines. They should be phased in with consultation, awareness-building, financial aid, technical training, and ecosystem support. Only then can MSMEs realistically upgrade to global standards.
Recommendations for Industry Stakeholders
Here’s how the wider tooling industry could translate this integrated approach into action:
- Advocacy for Clarification: Engage with BIS to secure exemptions or simplified certification pathways for bespoke punches that fall outside generic dimensions.
- Embrace Process Certification: Shift the focus from rigid product standards to formalised quality control processes, ensuring reliability through system certification.
- Leverage BIS as a Market Advantage: Use the BIS mark not only as a compliance requirement but as a seal of quality assurance, enhancing credibility in both domestic and export markets.
- Guidance and Training: Facilitate workshops with BIS and OEMs to provide consultancy support, helping MSMEs navigate certification requirements efficiently.
- Advocacy for Integrated Approach: Push for phased programmes of mandatory standards, backed by government support, with a clear roadmap spanning the next decade.
Conclusion
Quality Control Orders are essential for India’s industrial future. They provide the foundation for global competitiveness, consumer trust, and reduced import dependency. Their success depends on an implementation that is phased, consultative, and supportive of MSMEs.
As a first step, organising collaborative engagements, such as a webinar with BIS, DPIIT, DHI, and press tool manufacturers to initiate dialogue and build clarity, can help ensure that QCOs evolve from being perceived as burdens to becoming instruments of transformation, positioning Indian MSMEs as credible global players in the tooling industry.
*Press Tool- Punches (Quality Control) Order, 2020. Weblink: https://www.dpiit.gov.in/static/uploads/2025/07/8d9dc6d8abe91b676c4bc52d313da72d.pdf
About the Author
Sanjay Chavre is Advisor to TAGMA India.
A respected technocrat and policy strategist, Mr. Chavre has been a pivotal figure in the evolution of India’s manufacturing and tooling ecosystem. With decades of experience at the intersection of government and industry, he has contributed to the development of forward-looking policies that promote indigenous technology, strengthen domestic capabilities, and uplift MSMEs within the tooling and precision engineering sectors.
Mr. Chavre has held key roles in various government departments. He has been instrumental in formulating and executing initiatives that align with India’s long-term vision for industrial growth and self-reliance. His expertise lies in enabling public-private collaboration, fostering innovation ecosystems, and building frameworks that support sustainable industrial development.
In his current role as Advisor to TAGMA India, he continues to guide efforts aimed at enhancing the global competitiveness of Indian toolmakers. His insights have been vital in positioning the Indian tooling industry as a reliable and technologically advanced partner in the global supply chain.
This article was published in TAGMA Times
COMMENTS